Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37674152›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2023

Addressing non-response data for standardized post-acute functional items.

Chih -Ying Li, Hyunkyoung Kim, Brian Downer, Mi Jung Lee, Kenneth Ottenbacher, Yong-Fang Kuo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Chih -Ying LiDepartment of Occupational Therapy, School of Health Professions, University of Texas Medical Branch, Rm 3.906, 301 University Blvd., Galveston, TX, 77555-1142, USA. chili@utmb.edu.
Hyunkyoung KimOffice of Biostatistics, Department of Preventive Medicine & Public Health, University of Texas Medical Branch, 301 University Blvd., Galveston, TX, 77555-1148, USA.
Brian DownerDepartment of Population Health and Health Disparities, School of Public and Population Health, University of Texas Medical Branch, 301 University Blvd., Galveston, TX, 77555, USA.
Mi Jung LeeDepartment of Nutrition, Metabolism, and Rehabilitation Sciences, School of Health Professions, University of Texas Medical Branch, 301 University Blvd., Galveston, TX, 77555, USA.
Kenneth OttenbacherDepartment of Nutrition, Metabolism, and Rehabilitation Sciences, School of Health Professions, University of Texas Medical Branch, 301 University Blvd., Galveston, TX, 77555, USA.
Yong-Fang KuoOffice of Biostatistics, Department of Preventive Medicine & Public Health, University of Texas Medical Branch, 301 University Blvd., Galveston, TX, 77555-1148, USA.

Funding

Technique Development CoreP2CHD065702 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MED BR GALVESTON · PI GOODWIN, MD, JAMES S. · 2015 to 2019
$5.2M
Standardized Patient Assessment across Post-Acute Care: Opportunities and ChallengesK01HD101589 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MED BR GALVESTON · PI LI, CHIH-YING · 2020 to 2024
$632k
NICHD NIH HHS K01 HD101589NICHD NIH HHS P2C HD065702
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe post-acute patient standardized functional items (Section GG) include non-response options such as refuse, not attempt and not applicable. We examined non-response patterns and compared four methods to address non-response functional data in Section GG at nation-wide inpatient rehabilitation facilities (IRF).

methodsWe characterized non-response patterns using 100% Medicare 2018 data. We applied four methods to generate imputed values for each non-response functional item of each patient: Monte Carlo Markov Chains multiple imputations (MCMC), Fully Conditional Specification multiple imputations (FCS), Pattern-mixture model (PMM) multiple imputations and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) approach. We compared changes of Spearman correlations and weighted kappa between Section GG and the site-specific functional items across impairments before and after applying four methods.

resultsOne hundred fifty-nine thousand six hundred ninety-one Medicare fee-for-services beneficiaries admitted to IRFs with stroke, brain dysfunction, neurologic condition, orthopedic disorders, and debility. At discharge, 3.9% (self-care) and 61.6% (mobility) of IRF patients had at least one non-response answer in Section GG. Patients tended to have non-response data due to refused at discharge than at admission. Patients with non-response data tended to have worse function, especially in mobility; also improved less functionally compared to patients without non-response data. Overall, patients coded as 'refused' were more functionally independent in self-care and patients coded as 'not applicable' were more functionally independent in transfer and mobility, compared to other non-response answers. Four methods showed similar changes in correlations and agreements between Section GG and the site-specific functional items, but variations exist across impairments between multiple imputations and the CMS approach.

conclusionsThe different reasons for non-response answers are correlated with varied functional status. The high proportion of patients with non-response data for mobility items raised a concern of biased IRF quality reporting. Our findings have potential implications for improving patient care, outcomes, quality reporting, and payment across post-acute settings.

Indexed as

MedicareMusculoskeletal DiseasesAgedCenters for Medicare and Medicaid Services, U.S.HospitalizationHumansMarkov ChainsUnited StatesCritical care outcomesFunctional statusHealth careHealth services administrationMedicare payment advisory commissionMobilityOutcome and process assessmentPatient outcome assessmentSelf-careSubacute care

Identifiers

PMID37674152
PMCPMC10481609

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.